On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Michael Foord <fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk> wrote: > Given how high traffic python-checkins is I don't consider that a reasonable > place to send follow-up and nor do I consider it the responsibility of > committers to monitor it. As you said earlier this *isn't* in our standard > dev procedures and nor do I think it should be. If you can't find an email > address then either python-comitters or python-dev would be a better place > to send feedback.
Umm, yeah it is - Brett's Intro to Development *is* the documentation of the workflow procedures, and it says that committers are expected to subscribe to both python-checkins and python-committers. And, as I said, I've been working this way for years, and haven't seen any of my comments or anyone else's made on python-checkins go unaddressed (although we've occasionally had to follow up by finding the committer's email address and adding it directly, that's fairly rare). It *really* isn't very hard to ignore most of the traffic on that list and just look at your own commits (and any responses). (I don't do that myself unless I'm busy, as I quite like doing after the fact reviews of commits) Bringing the whole of python-dev into a python-checkins discussion is only necessary if there are any actual disagreements regarding a commit (99% of what we spot in post review is just typos in documentation, comments and text strings, as well as minor things like poor choices of internal variable names). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
